Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    October 31, 2014 9:00pm-9:31pm PDT

9:00 pm
>> good afternoon my name is john, i live almost directly across from the street from the larkin youth center i sport larkin street but on opposed to this application for twenty-four hours i've been a supporter of larkin street intentions irresistance a young prosecutor in trying cases in the room we're 90 in now they've performed a tremendous service for children that have become adults i'm saddeneded there are many failures and problems it seems like people are trying to frame the issue that is before you that people support larkin i know my neighbors do
9:01 pm
and vs. not supporting it i support larkin street but i don't support everything they do and i don't support the fact they've broken promises they've tried to justify they made commitments to the neighborhood it is seems like a claefk bait-and-switch i was at the meeting that our periphery w at and she was troubled by the fact there is a bait-and-switch here i think it's why we're not hearing from her as a big supporter of the increase to twenty-four hours it is really a residential hotel across the street neighbors were welcoming the neighbors continued to be welcoming in support of those young kids that are runaways or homelessness or both
9:02 pm
but how supportive does that particular couple of blocks think about your own neighborhood or the block our open are you will that accept 10 kids in an emergency situation 20, 30? how much is enough for one neighborhood i think taking care of who could be against trying to help needy people? it would be hard to imagine what type of person would do that how much burden does this particular neighborhood have to accept i feel like larkin street has really somewhat take advantage of a welcoming neighborhood and a with me couple of blocks i purchased there and it's a
9:03 pm
small place not a mansion and two of my four rooms including the bathroom >> thank you sir, your time is up. >> i don't think there was a time can i have one more - >> sorry. >> thank you >> next speaker >> good afternoon chair and commissioners my name is allen a staff member of the san francisco youth commission i want to pass this letter of support on to you guys so on october 6th meeting the youth meeting had a unanimous support for the twenty-four hours and respect to the services that the larkin street provides to homelessness people under the age of 18 and prefsht this is supportive of the
9:04 pm
services at the shelter and thank you so much fewer public service. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? i'm sorry sir, i think you've already spoken. >> upper two memorable (laughter). >> do you want to come up? good evening, commissioners i'm pete i'm actually here for the next item but i for a a long time was the president of the merchant association and had a similar experience in 2, 3, 4 that capacity we had a resource center in the 90s oh, can't really remember what organization it was but a proposed center on cap street
9:05 pm
and all of the businesses leader and all the business owners on those blocks were opposed to that resource center because cap street was not the greatest place and my goodness all the people i was a bar and night club owner it made sense because everybody was on 16th emission and gosh isn't it easy to kind of shuttle them along and help those folks out i did a lot of lobbying and the center went in and been there ever sense i think actually helped the neighborhood i know people have
9:06 pm
reservations and not like a liquor or church but a lot of times it workouts and i just wanted to share that with you guys as an experience >> thank you is there any additional public comment okay seeing none, public comment is closed i'll open with a couple of comments i'm happy to support this application i think that larkin street has shown the desire to outreach to the neighbors and hold those monthly meetings and this contact log ways helpful if other commissioners are interested i'll be open to a condition on the what's the backyard use maybe well, i'll just put that out there commissioner antonini. >> i'm inclined to support this too because life is a
9:07 pm
twenty-four hour experience to having a facility only there at night life presumably the people that are staying there and sleeping during the hours so the other 16 hours loor kin street should be working with them for education and experience and training and nutrition and drug or alcohol problems treatment i hope that's what's happening so that's part of what the neighborhood is concerned about it their sleeping and no rules during the other 16 hours there's problems we have enough problems in the hate already so that's part of the my approval will be predicted on assurances from larkin street they'll be working with the youth to make sure they're being taken care of in the manner i've talked about
9:08 pm
and they're moving towards their independence i think so there's a limit of 80 days and move into other facility for housing but we aim to have all those people eventually become able to support themselves independently and not be housed in a shelter situation so i'm assuming that's the case and assuming there are rules for behavior did i talk to some place from larkin street and be assured that's how that works. >> sheryl this is an emergency shelter so young people are there itch much less than thirty
9:09 pm
days actually quite short during the day now folks go to our drop in center if their enrolled it's a high exception they meet with the case managers to work on the transition we don't want them staying with us but engaged in the services in order to have a more permanent solution to a temporary shelter problems. >> i have some sort of rules so you tell them they can't be out on hate street causing problems and if there is problems i can kick them out. >> our exception their engaged if the plan we've agreed to if they're hanging identity in other parts of city they don't
9:10 pm
need an emergency flange service so we help them at the shelter and at the evening have a better chance of not dpaement in those activities folks are inside the shelter and we check the blocks making sure they are not hanging out and we have cameras and in terms of the noise and the backyards we have - expect them to be inside before 9 their away they need to be quiet. >> i'm sure you many cases are here for reasons they couldn't stay with their families or acceptance but also take care of the youth returning to other
9:11 pm
places to care for them. >> reunification is a principle goal or kids that runaway from a facility it's a temporary solution until we find either reunite kids with their families or get them into another program. the court: thank you, very much. i'm supportive and will be supportive of the suggested amendments that or conditions that appetite an operational plan to the liaison to the neighborhood with restrictions on loiter or noise problems and for the purposes of insuring the neighborhoods we're trying to help we want to have a six months look back to get a report back to the commission to make
9:12 pm
sure things are moving to the satisfaction of the neighborhood that's my feeling and commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much couple of things definitely supportive of the cu i know the original application was for a change of hours by the way, we're luke additional modifications i'll go through in my list of comments some will be supportive and not not first one i'd like to talk about some of the you know opponents to the project and he'd the issues so i understand that the operators may have discusses with community members before and talked about this one being an overnight facility it is not viable to what we're facing a
9:13 pm
you 24/7 facility which will be better than none at all that is not a topic people want to talk about i understand the issue people feel like theirs broken promises unfortunately, that's how things go and so that's where we are other thing i wanted to mention was yes, if there were across from my street i think it is great yes. >> and then i wanted to get to talk a little bit about the twenty-four hour use this is some thought again, we received a lot of e-mails and letters h that are included in the packet that's kind of what i'm addressing i actually think a six months look back we'll see a lot of improvements because some of the neighborhood issues or sort of behavorial issues people
9:14 pm
have seen with the facility you're dealing with a young population that has no where to go when is earlier and 8 o'clock at night if you have a facility that's open 24/7 you'll see fire people loitering because they could be inside watching tv or hanging out on the patio or work with their can say manager i think a lot of the issues that are problematic actually a symptom of not having a facility between 8 o'clock in the morning and 8 o'clock at night i'm in support of the cu i want to get to my thoughts a little bit it sulz there are things that have been agreed to by larkin
9:15 pm
services in the shelter that are part of the community agreement whether or not their included as modifications to our cu may go through in terms of the numbers and the shelter i'm in agreement i think part of our heirs situation there's from the homelessness that have no where to go up to affordability issues i don't agree with changes that lowers the beds if 20 i've been working 20 and i don't understand why it needs to be lower 16 was what was agreed, too, and 12 and below i think i don't know that is going to be part of the mischievous or is cu it doesn't have to be question larkin street why that's a change that needs to be made that's a personal commentary and
9:16 pm
i want to get to things in terms of the overnight facility we're looking at a lot of changes that impacts the types of activities or behaviors we see in overnight period this is has been also overnight i'm questioning in my mind why it is now just now that we need to impose a lot of controls on the patio and having someone sitting in the backyards and watching people i want to ask larkin street someone to come up and talk about has there been a rash of scomplaments i think that's a valid thing to ask for a point of view why is it now that people want to have
9:17 pm
those additional controls when it sounds like you have a curfew or other types of controls. >> so thank you. i think just to clarify during the day roadway people go to our center they have a place but folks showing up earlier or running from school or an activist that means they're waiting until the staff it there it is better since denice is over there i think the backyard it was rebuilt and young people go out there but we put that curfew in place in irons to the neighbors concerns before that he started the conversation about the 24/7 we're fine that 4th of july with quiet out back it's perfectly appropriate it was up to 10 this
9:18 pm
is consistent with the quiet policy in the city the backyard is small and the noise carries we're comfortable only operating 8 to 8 they're not in the backyard when people are trying to go to sleep. >> that's a perfectly fine answer and i wanted to know if you guys were already operating why now to add additional stuff we're talking about controls in the bashlgd i won't suggest any but in other commissioners are fine with it i'm fine. >> commissioner richards i'll turn the microphone on i'm impressed with larkin and the operation and the log you presented to us that's helpful
9:19 pm
you've been at this 21 years i'm impressed with the clean up of 5 hundred block i know situations change to the neighbors points things are not frozen in time and larkin operates in good faith and if they were not to go twenty-four hours they'll losses their fund we have a twenty-four hours shelter i wonder how many of the issues have bin created as other commissioners are as a result of not being twenty-four hours if we have a look back i want to see what the change looks like i guess a i have a question for the gentleman the person with the shirt and tie i'm sorry, i doesn't catch our name john. >> have you seen the operations agreement. >> i'm sorry. >> have you seen the operation
9:20 pm
agreement the gentleman handed in with a letter with what would you do it change the current situation to make it better. >> my concern is that i have two of my 4 rooms i was planning on retiring in is on the street the street is noisy i was a teenager ones i swear to god if i had a place to go in and out all the time i was not a wonderful eternal i was making noise maybe if i heard someone hearsay a had a joint. >> so there's allotting in the front. >> i can't read a book and as far as losing the funding larkin street has presented like they'll lose all their funding only a pox. >> so ms. adams a request is
9:21 pm
there anything in the operation agreement deal with loitering. >> yes. the city operations manual that we distributed to neighbors at the september meeting i think does include expectations and rules about being out front hourly walks for cameras to check out front and times people have shown up before 8:00 p.m. >> i'll move to mocking make that r with an approval that the operation rules you put together. >> can we get an opinion about that from staff. >> sure. >> david lindsey department staff we we were requested by neighbors in the last week to
9:22 pm
include the operations manual be folded into the conditions and did review that with the zoning administrator who felt uncomfortable with that he believed that we certainly have it referenced as a binding in the motion. >> sure. >> to actually include. >> fine we reference the fact they have one. >> sooepz to the backyard i have a policy 6 months. >> that's a written report to the commission. >> second. >> councilmember sharp. >> i have a question on the motion and also for representative arrest part of the agreement includes the reduction to 16; is that correct? >> yes. >> okay. so the motion then would include that number as the
9:23 pm
number being approved and yes and that's fine. >> okay. if that's part of the motion sounds like i'm flavor of it and look back in 6 months and make finding that speak to the situation regarding the conditions that have been agreed on. >> commissioner richards. >> so in 6 months we come back and everything is great and can we have a - and excuse me. david lindsey the motion as a reads right now is up to 20 i believe so if you wanted to change it. >> why don't we do 167 for the first 6 months and when we come back to the report why not make it 20. >> it would have to be a new
9:24 pm
ccii process they'll have to go through the process again. >> i'm cool with it going up to 20. >> and the community agreement can reduce it to 15 and a. >> i'm looking to ms. adams. >> the motion will include that up to 20 we can make an agreement with the neighbors to reduce it to 16 we'll have the flexibility if the agreement with the neighbors to move it up 16 is a maximum occupancy but 20 to have the flexibility is great. >> that's my motion. >> second. >> commissioners, we have a motion and a second to approve this conditional use with conditions including a reference to the operating procedures as a
9:25 pm
finding and motion to require a written update in 6 months. >> commissioner antonini commissioner johnson commissioner richards commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero. (clapping.) >> commissioners. >> thank you if those could please exit quietly inadequately quieting we have numerous issues left. >> that places you on the next issue on jones street for a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon commissioner president wu and members of the committee carli grove the item is a request for conditional use authorization to modify a prior existing restaurant known as
9:26 pm
jones the commission originally approved the conditional use authorization brown below the ground floor the interior portion located at the basement and the restaurant includes an outdoor patio of a one story parking structure on geary street the patio is an outdoor activity area they've applied to expend the permitted hours of operation from midnight to 2:00 a.m. during the hearing the commission added a condition of approval, however, they were not added to the final motion on april 15th therefore an incomplete version was posted the error was found on april of
9:27 pm
2010 when a neighbor commented on the condition of approval it was mailed and the website not updated in summary of 2009 the project manager investing money and the project sponsor had researched the pen and said it contained an incorrect hours of operation the planning department issued a notice of issued violation past midnight open the patio the project sponsor was provided an updated motion and the project sponsor asked for a hearing to protest the hearing it was on july 10th it was appealed to the broildz on october 24, 2012, where the board voted to continue the item
9:28 pm
to the the clerk will take the roll for the conditional use authorization to date the department has received the following public comments 11 letters and have 47 surveys of support for residents and businesses and community groups citing that the operator of jones has been good neighbors and brought positive change to the neighborhood 5 phone calls with residents that are unhappy cited the restaurants has noise past midnight and are upset of the behaviors one neighbor said there would be more 0 supportive 0 support if the hours were on expanded on the weekend and to there security in addition to public comment the department has received calls to the san
9:29 pm
francisco police department between june 2013 and august 2014 of 15 noise complaints 3 were at night and one referenced to the patio 4 occurred on the pride event in violation of the gop good neighbor policy the department recommendations disapproval and believes the project is not desirable outdoor activity area is leaked in a dense area between two hotels to extend the hours of operation on the patio to 2:00 a.m. that will be a nuisance for hotel guests the current are operators of jones is approving of the activity and the project sponsor has significant outreach to
9:30 pm
neighborhood including replacing windows, however, the modified conditions will run with the land and in the ownership or the tenant changes future operators will be lows engaged with the community extending the hours would be a negative issue and they meet the planning code but not compatible with the that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer questions. >> project sponsor. >> i'm wondering if it would be acceptable to allow anyone who is here to oppose the project to present first and we'll go after that. >> it is a strange

4 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on